Arguments Against Banning Books

Emily Moore

Mrs. Johnson

English 11

10 January 2018

The Right to Read

The Diary of Anne Frank, The Scarlet Letter, and To Kill a Mockingbird all have something in common. These books not only have been staples in english curriculum across the nation for many years, but they also have been banned and challenged time after time for their content. Although theses novels teach valuable lessons, some people cannot seem to look past certain parts of their plots. Many groups have taken action to ban an abundance of books that they personally feel people should not be exposed to. Banning books prevents a well rounded education, takes away the right to choose what to read, and will ultimately have no real purpose because people will be exposed to

the situations regardless.
The banning of books is detrimental to education. Books are a necessity for development. A 2013 study in the journal of science found that reading even fiction novels improved students test scores on empathy, social perception, and had a more advanced emotional intelligence (Bancroft 2). The reason why? Books provide exposure to things a student might not have knowledge of in their everyday life, which helps students understand and better empathize with other people (Bancroft 3). Books bans are put in place to protect people from tough ideas and information, but without these tough ideas students would stay oblivious to the world around them (Lopez 1). Restricting tough topics from the brains of students encourage a constricted view point and do not allow their own viewpoints to be challenged (Lopez 3). Reading helps students try new ideas, experience other places in the world, and learn new things about their surroundings (McNeil 2). Banning these types of books deprive students from learning about these experiences which thus damages growth and that is the basis of school systems: growth (McNeil 2). Books open up the mind to the vast differences in the world which allows society to progress because students would have the information that enables them to care about the overall well being of the world (Lopez 3). Without real information and stories about a topic, there would be no way for students to form their own opinions making them unable to care because they do not know enough information to. Books that have been part of the English curriculum should not just be thrown out due to complaints because there is a reason why they are vital to education. Otherwise they would not be a part of the english curriculum in the first place.
Students have the right to read. Parents have to teach their children to figure out for themselves what they want to read (Dell’Antonia 3). If students did not get to choose for themselves, they would not know how to be independent and choose what they wanted to read, instead of some censored version of a timeless story. Schools should not restrict these challenged or banned books just because a group of people dislikes the books content (Lopez 2). Parents however have the right to dictate their own child’s reading, but other parents do not have the right to tell other children that are not their own what they should and should not read (Bancroft 3). Not only do students have to right to read any content they please, but all people benefit from the right to read. The Chinese government for example, bans tons of stories about human rights because if citizens new the truths about theses polices the citizens would stop funding them (Biao 1). By avoiding sensitive topics like policy-tinkering to be read about, government money will continue going into that program (Biao 3). These policies are violations of human rights, and are opposite of any free society values (Biao 4). This same government censorship is the same thing that is happening in our schools. By avoiding these sensitive books schools prevent upsetting some people, but they do it of the cost of rights and education.
Furthermore, banning books is virtually pointless.

Colete Bancroft tells a story in her article Ban a Book, Draw Readers about how one of her college professors told her students not to read one chapter of a book. Due to natural curiosity, everyone read that chapter of the book, even people who had not read one other word of the book read that part just to see why she told them not too (Bancroft 2). Telling students not to read a book is more effective getting students to read it than telling them they have to read it. (Bancroft 2). Censorship is unnecessary because students will explore the bounds of life anyways (Lopez 2). Banning books is an ineffective solution to a nonexistent problem that is ultimately a waste of time because kids will read regardless of who tells them what (Lopez 3). Also, reading gives students a safe way to explore the world, instead of having to find out about these difficult topics the hard way (McNeil 2). After reading about these tough topics, students would be more prepared to deal with difficult events in their own life (Bancroft 3). Most students need to be exposed to these difficult topics so they can talk about them with others (McNeil 2). Depriving students from exploring life situations damages growth and worsens their impact on society (McNeil 2). Overall, the banishment of some books only causes more damage because it limits exposure to inevitable situations that ultimately shape a person. Students will be exposed to bad things eventually, so why ban a book about it with a theme and lesson from the

bad?
Countless books have been challenged for their content year after year. Even books like To Kill a Mockingbird, Looking for Alaska, and The Holy Bible have been challenged for their content. Although these novels teach valuable lessons, some people cannot seem to look past certain parts of their plot. Many groups have taken action to ban an abundance of books that they personally feel people should not read. Banning books evidently prevents a well rounded education, takes away the right to choose what to read, and will ultimately have no real purpose because people will be exposed to the situation regardless. Books are written and published for a reason, and a group of people should not have a say in who reads what.